Connect with us

Accounting

Macy’s shares fall after profit hit by accounting error

Published

on

Macy’s Inc. trimmed its profit outlook after concluding its investigation into an employee plot to hide millions of dollars in expenses.

The misstatement of delivery expenses, which Macy’s has said was linked to a former employee who intentionally hid costs, will have a full-year impact of $79 million on gross margin and adjusted earnings per share, according to a statement on Wednesday. Most of the impact will be recorded in the fourth quarter. 

As a result, Macy’s reduced its earnings outlook to $2.25 to $2.50 per share from a previous range from August that topped out at $2.90. It also lowered its projected gross margin rate. 

Macy’s shares fell 8.2% in premarket trading in New York. Through Tuesday, the stock had fallen 17% this year.

Macy’s said the investigation concluded that there was “no material impact or restatements” to its previously filed financial statements. The company reiterated that the probe didn’t uncover evidence of missing cash or unpaid vendors and instead points to accounting errors by a former employee who hid approximately $151 million in delivery expenses from the fourth quarter of 2021 through the third quarter of this year. The company said it will publish revised financial information for those fiscal years on Wednesday.ported.

“We’ve concluded our investigation and are strengthening our existing controls and implementing additional changes designed to prevent this from happening again,” Chief Executive Officer Tony Spring said in a statement. 

During the past several years, Macy’s has focused on reducing its delivery expenses and other costs to increase profitability. The company’s chief financial officer mentioned delivery expenses in all but one of the 16 quarterly earnings calls that he’s participated in since joining the retailer in 2020.

Investigators were told by the employee that, initially, a mistake was made in accounting for delivery expenses, according to a person familiar with the investigation who asked not to be named disclosing information that hasn’t been made public. After that initial mistake, the employee intentionally made erroneous accounting entries to hide the mistake, the person added. The employee no longer works at Macy’s, the retailer has said. 

Macy’s said in a regulatory filing published on Wednesday that it found “material weakness” in its internal controls over manual journal entries of delivery expenses and other non-merchandise expenses. The company added that the former employee also falsified underlying documentation.

The department-store operator said it has begun to implement changes to improve its internal controls including by “re-evaluating the risk of employee circumvention of controls.” 

Macy’s also raised its outlook for full year sales. It now sees net sales in a range of $22.3 billion to $22.5 billion, up from the prior view of $22.1 billion to $22.4 billion. Same-store sales at owned and licensed locations are expected to be flat to down 1% versus the previous year. The company previously expected that measure to decline as much as 2%. 

The department-store operator delayed the reporting of its full third-quarter earnings last month when it revealed the accounting problem and instead released preliminary numbers. 

Activist pressure

Macy’s is under pressure from Barington Capital Group and Thor Equities LLC, who are urging the company to form a separate real estate unit while cutting its capital expenditures. They’re also calling on Macy’s to consider spinning off its higher-end Bloomingdale’s and Bluemercury chains. 

Barington and Thor want seats on Macy’s board and would encourage the retailer to create an internal subsidiary for its real estate that would include all of the company’s owned and leased properties, including its stores and distribution centers. Macy’s would then pay rent to the subsidiary.

Barington owned 650,000 Macy’s shares, or a 0.2% stake, according to a Sept. 30 regulatory filing. That was an increase from the 100,000 Macy’s shares it owned as of June. 

Macy’s has said it will maintain its current strategy, which focuses on improving results at the company’s most-profitable locations.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Global ESG Reporting Standards and Double Materiality Compliance

Published

on

Corporate accounting departments face expanding reporting expectations as international sustainability disclosure standards achieve regulatory enforcement across major global jurisdictions. Chief Accounting Officers (CAOs) and corporate controllers are establishing rigorous internal accounting controls to treat Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) metrics with the same data precision, auditability, and governance as traditional financial statements.

Regulatory Harmonization Under Global Sustainability Frameworks
The implementation of standardized sustainability reporting frameworks—notably rules established by international sustainability accounting boards—has created unified expectations for public and large private enterprises. Corporations must report standardized metrics covering greenhouse gas emissions (Scope 1, 2, and material Scope 3), energy utilization, workforce demographics, and supply chain governance.

In Europe and other participating international jurisdictions, double materiality principles are mandatory. Under double materiality, organizations must report both how external sustainability risks impact corporate financial performance, and how internal corporate operations affect surrounding environmental and social structures.

Integrating Sustainability Metrics into Core ERP Systems
To provide auditable non-financial data, enterprise organizations are integrating specialized carbon accounting and ESG management platforms directly into core ERP systems. Automated data collectors capture energy utility invoices, logistics fuel consumption metrics, and vendor compliance records in real time.

Establishing automated, traceable data pipelines ensures that non-financial reporting is supported by clear audit trails. This structured approach allows external financial auditors to provide reasonable assurance on sustainability disclosures during annual corporate reporting cycles.

Financial Impacts and Capital Market Disclosure
Accurate ESG reporting directly influences corporate cost of capital and institutional credit ratings. Commercial lenders and institutional asset managers systematically incorporate sustainability metrics into risk pricing models. Companies that demonstrate transparent, verifiable progress in operational energy efficiency and climate risk mitigation benefit from expanded access to green bond markets and lower debt pricing.

Action Steps for Accounting Leadership
1. Implement Double Materiality Frameworks: Conduct comprehensive assessments to identify material financial and operational sustainability metrics.
2. Build Auditable Non-Financial Data Pipelines: Automate ESG data collection within core accounting software to ensure data integrity.
3. Align Sustainability with Annual Financial Filings: Prepare non-financial disclosures concurrently with financial statements to satisfy regulatory audit expectations.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Modernizing Internal Controls: Machine Learning and Continuous Monitoring in Auditing

Published

on

Internal audit departments and corporate risk managers are modernizing internal control frameworks by shifting from periodic sampling techniques to continuous monitoring and machine learning analytics. As operational data volumes increase across enterprise organizations, automated control testing ensures financial integrity, prevents corporate fraud, and streamlines annual audit engagements.

The Limitation of Periodic Audit Sampling
Historically, internal and external auditors evaluated internal controls by reviewing random samples of financial transactions—often analyzing less than five percent of total ledger entries. In complex enterprise environments, periodic sampling methods carry inherent risks of overlooking localized financial misstatements, unauthorized disbursements, or operational control breakdowns.

In 2026, progressive internal audit functions are utilizing automated continuous monitoring platforms that evaluate one hundred percent of financial transactions in real time. Continuous control auditing systems continuously monitor general ledger entries, procurement approvals, and expense reimbursements across all operating subsidiaries.

AI-Powered Fraud Detection and Anomaly Identification
Machine learning models trained on historical corporate financial data excel at identifying subtle transactional anomalies that indicate potential fraud or operational error. Automated systems instantly flag duplicate invoice payments, unapproved vendor creation, unusual journal entry timing, and unauthorized override of authority thresholds.

When an anomaly is detected, the automated auditing platform generates an instant risk alert, allowing internal audit teams to investigate root causes immediately. Early detection prevents minor operational errors from escalating into material weaknesses in financial reporting.

Streamlining External Audit Preparation
Continuous internal control monitoring delivers significant benefits during annual external financial audits. External audit firms can review continuous audit logs and automated control testing documentation, reducing the time required for manual field testing.

This integrated approach lowers overall audit compliance fees, reduces administrative burdens on corporate accounting staff, and provides senior management and audit committees with real-time visibility into the organization’s overall risk profile.

Core Implementation Guidelines
1. Transition to 100% Data Testing: Replace legacy sampling methods with automated continuous audit monitoring systems.
2. Deploy Anomaly Detection Algorithms: Implement machine learning models to identify unauthorized transactions and operational control overrides.
3. Align Internal and External Audit Workflows: Coordinate continuous control testing protocols with external auditors to optimize annual compliance cycles.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Automated Tax Compliance and Global Regulatory Harmonization in 2026

Published

on

Corporate tax accounting departments are navigating an era of unprecedented regulatory complexity as global tax harmonization frameworks take full effect alongside real-time digital tax reporting mandates. Tax directors and accounting teams are adopting cloud-based tax compliance automation tools to manage multi-jurisdictional tax liabilities and satisfy stringent reporting rules across international jurisdictions.

Implementation of Global Minimum Tax Provisions
The implementation of international tax reform agreements—notably the Pillar Two global minimum tax framework—has reshaped multinational corporate tax planning. Multinational enterprises with consolidated revenues exceeding established thresholds must ensure an effective tax rate of at least 15% across every jurisdiction in which they operate.

Accounting teams are implementing specialized tax calculation modules integrated directly into enterprise resource planning (ERP) platforms. These automated tools calculate effective tax rates per country, identify top-up tax liabilities, and generate standardized compliance documentation required by national tax authorities.

Real-Time Digital Invoicing and E-Reporting Mandates
Tax authorities across Europe, Latin America, and Asia-Pacific have enacted mandatory electronic invoicing (e-invoicing) and continuous transaction controls (CTC). Under these systems, corporate transaction data must be submitted electronically to government portals in real time at the point of sale or invoice issuance.

This shift toward continuous digital tax reporting eliminates traditional annual tax audits in favor of ongoing automated compliance monitoring. Accounting departments are upgrading invoicing software to ensure seamless XML data formatting, digital signature authentication, and real-time validation against tax authority databases.

Automation and Data Analytics in Corporate Tax Strategy
To keep pace with dynamic tax legislation, tax departments are transitioning from reactive compliance teams to proactive strategic advisors. Machine learning algorithms analyze corporate transactional data to identify tax credits, research and development (R&D) incentives, and cross-border transfer pricing adjustments.

By automating routine tax return filings and calculations, corporate tax directors can focus on long-term capital structuring, evaluating the tax implications of corporate mergers, and optimizing international supply chain networks.

Strategic Priorities for Tax Executives
1. ERP System Upgrades: Ensure enterprise software is capable of generating real-time, granular tax data required for global minimum tax compliance.
2. E-Invoicing Integration: Implement scalable e-invoicing platforms to satisfy regional continuous transaction control regulations.
3. Strategic Tax Analytics: Utilize predictive tax modeling tools to evaluate structural changes in corporate operations and cross-border trade.

Continue Reading

Trending